In the use of a needle or catheter which is inserted intravenously into a patient, it is common to secure the needle and tubing to the patient by taping. In order to maintain the sterility of the needle, a sterile gauze pad is placed over the needle and taped to the body. Not only is the tearing of the adhesive strips and positioning of the gauze time consuming, but the needle or tubing can easily come loose unless the adhesive strips are properly and securely placed. In addition, if it is desired to inspect the insertion site or apply an antibiotic, the adhesive strips must be lifted and then carefully replaced. Failure to inspect the insertion site can result in undetected infiltration.
A number of devices in the prior art have been disclosed which hold the needle down and allow observation of the insertion site. For example, in U.S. Pat. No. 3,900,026 to Wagner and No. 3,782,377 to Rychlik, a transparent dome is adhesively held over the needle insertion site. Another patent disclosing a transparent window over the insertion site is U.S. Pat. No. 3,782,378 to Page. In this patent, the flexible transparent cover is held in place by an elastic band. Besides a transparent window, it has also been suggested that an easily raised covering be used to allow inspection of the insertion site whenever desired. In U.S. Pat. No. 4,059,105 to Cutruzzula et al, a first layer having an aperture is adhesively attached over the needle and insertion site. A second, wider portion is then foldable over this first portion and it too is adhesively held to the body. When desired, the second portion is peeled back to expose the aperture in the first portion for inspection of the insertion site. Instead of viewing the insertion site itself, it has also been suggested that a site near the insertion site be observed instead. Thus, in U.S. Pat. No. 3,973,565 to Steer, an adhesive covering for holding a needle down has an aperture which is located near the insertion site.
There are a number of disadvantages to each of the prior art systems. Where the insertion site is observable in the prior art, it is generally not easily accessible. On the other hand, where the insertion site is accessible as in the device disclosed in the Cutruzzula et al patent, it is not observable at all times. In addition, the constant peeling back of the upper layer in such a device to observe the insertion site would irritate the skin to which the upper layer is adhesively secured.